The Himachal Pradesh High Court has reaffirmed that statutory interest on delayed payment of retiral benefits must be paid, even if the employer subsequently releases the principal amount and admits liability for interest. This judgment upholds existing precedent and will serve as binding authority for similar disputes involving pension and retirement dues across public sector undertakings.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | CWP/12198/2025 of USHA DEVI Vs HRTC AND OTHERS |
| CNR | HPHC010446802025 |
| Date of Registration | 26-07-2025 |
| Decision Date | 01-09-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | Disposed Off |
| Judgment Author | HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTSNA REWAL DUA |
| Court | High Court of Himachal Pradesh |
| Bench | Single Judge (Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua) |
| Precedent Value | Binding on subordinate courts in Himachal Pradesh |
| Overrules / Affirms | Affirms statutory entitlement to interest on delayed retiral benefits |
| Type of Law | Service Law / Pensionary & Retiral Benefits |
| Questions of Law | Whether statutory interest is payable on delayed payment of retiral benefits after the principal is paid |
| Ratio Decidendi |
|
| Facts as Summarised by the Court |
Petitioner’s husband died in harness. Although Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity and Leave Encashment were sanctioned and later paid, the interest for delayed payment was still outstanding. Employer undertook to pay interest within four weeks. |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts in Himachal Pradesh |
| Persuasive For | Other High Courts in India |
| Follows | Established principles requiring interest payment for delayed retiral dues |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- Reaffirms that payment of statutory interest on delayed retiral benefits is not discretionary once delay is admitted.
- Even after release of principal pensionary dues, unpaid interest remains recoverable by judicial direction.
- Sets an enforceable compliance period for payment of statutory interest (four weeks in this case).
- Lawyers may cite this judgment for expeditious orders on interest component for delayed retiral dues.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The petitioner was awaiting statutory retiral benefits after her husband’s death in harness; amount due had been sanctioned but remained unpaid for some time.
- After being put on notice by the court, the employer released all principal retiral dues.
- However, the petitioner pressed for interest on the delayed payments, which the employer acknowledged as due and agreed to discharge.
- Court noted employer’s concession and, accordingly, ordered payment of statutory interest within a definite four-week period.
- Judicial direction was issued to ensure timely and full compliance with statutory obligations regarding retiral interest.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner
- Admitted that all retiral benefits (DCRG, Leave Encashment) had now been paid.
- Claimed outstanding statutory interest for delayed payment.
Respondent (Employer)
- Confirmed all retiral dues had been paid.
- Consent to pay statutory interest on delayed benefits within four weeks.
Factual Background
The petitioner’s husband, an employee, died while in service on 21.09.2023. The petitioner awaited payment of Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity, which had been sanctioned but not released for a significant period. Following a court notice, the employer released all principal pensionary dues but had not paid statutory interest on the delayed payments. The petitioner moved the court for this unpaid interest, and the employer undertook to pay the same within four weeks.
Statutory Analysis
- The judgment refers to the “statutory interest liability” on delayed payment of retiral benefits.
- No specific statutory section is discussed, but the court enforces liability for statutory interest as part of established service jurisprudence.
- The scope and content of “statutory interest” as an enforceable obligation are confirmed in the context of pensionary benefits.
Dissenting / Concurring Opinion Summary
No dissenting or concurring opinions were recorded in this single-judge decision.
Procedural Innovations
- The court enforced compliance by giving a fixed time period (four weeks) for payment of statutory interest after recording the respondent’s concession.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – Judgment upholds and enforces established law on delayed retiral dues.
Citations
No specific SCC, AIR, or other law report citations were provided in the judgment.